Monday, December 1, 2014

Corporate Welfare and Subsidized Pollution Activity....Need to Stop it--Great Salon article recapping the tragedy

7 leading candidates for corporate rip-off of the year: Pharmaceutical companies are jacking up drug prices, while Wal-Mart is paying its employees with your money & the Koch Brothers store polluting materials upwind from homes & schools...

http://www.salon.com/2014/11/28/7_leading_candidates_for_corporate_rip_off_of_the_year_partner/?source=newsletter

More Evidence that Col. Paul Cook -R (CA-08) Lied to Get Votes....the Job Bills he voted for and bragged about in his campaign literature are as bogus as he is destructive of our environment

(1) Jobs Bills That Don't Create Jobs: What Republican Control Could Mean

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/30/republican-jobs-bills_n_6227190.html

(2) None Of The 40 Jobs Bills That John Boehner Claims House Republicans Passed Create Jobs

http://www.politicususa.com/2014/09/08/40-jobs-bills-john-boehner-claims-house-republicans-passed-create-jobs.html

(3) Economists See Limited Gains in GOP Plan

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/23/us/politics/economists-see-holes-in-a-republican-wish-list.html?_r=0

(4) Boehner’s ‘Bipartisan’ Bunk

http://www.factcheck.org/2014/11/boehners-bipartisan-bunk/

Friday, November 28, 2014

Paul Cook's HR 4795 Vote is another Koch Brothers Payback....and Will Cause Layoffs

Paul Cook votes "yeah" on H.R. 4795 (the Promoting New Manufacturing Act) saying it will put Americans back to work...ah....The facts?? 
.The Committee on Energy and Commerce, November Democratic Staff report on H.R. 4795 says:
.
"H.R. 4795 does nothing to promote new manufacturing or to improve the permitting process for new and expanding manufacturing facilities. Instead, the bill weakens air quality protections, allows more pollution, and threatens public health.
.
The current Clean Air Act requires major new or expanding sources of air pollution to obtain permits with pollution limits before the facilities start construction. State and local air agencies issue the majority of these permits. Under current law, a permit applicant must identify the pollution controls it will install at the new or expanded facility and demonstrate that the facility’s emissions will not violate national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Under current law, when the EPA updates a NAAQS to reflect the latest science and protect public health, the permit applicant has to show that its emissions will not cause a violation of the updated, more protective standard".
.
"H.R. 4795 creates a loophole in this process. The bill gives new and expanded facilities “amnesty” from new science-based air quality standards"--so Bob Conaway asks, is this how the Koch Brothers will be able to profit from newer refineries and pipelines like the Keystone?--by being able to pollute more, spend less on pollution controls and create a competitive disadvantage for existing extraction, transportation and refinery systems?
.
The House Staff report continues:
.
"H.R. 4795 could allow some facilities to emit extra pollution at levels that could harm public health. H.R. 4795 shifts the cost of air pollution control to existing manufacturing facilities
In an area with unhealthy air, pollution is a zero-sum game. An increase in pollution in one place has to be offset by reductions elsewhere. So if new facilities are allowed to emit more, existing facilities will have to emit less to make up for that extra pollution. That
is unfair and makes it more expensive to achieve healthy air.
.
Allowing new facilities to pollute more means that existing industrial facilities will have to do more to reduce their emissions at a higher cost" which Bob Conaway says " will increase overhead to existing energy producers following the law--how is that fair and how will that create jobs? If anything it may force layoffs for existing firms to stay competitive --right Mr. Cook?"
.
When will Paul Cook and his fellow Koch Congress cadets stop paying back the Koch Brothers? How far down the rabbit hole do we get thrown?


Wednesday, November 26, 2014

Paul Cook votes to Gag Independent Expert Review of Environmental Policy Decisions

Paul Cook on November 18, 2014 voted "yes" on HR 1422  [called the EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2013]. It passed 229-191 (the usual Boehner led majority).
.
In what might be the most ridiculous aspect of H.R. 1422 is that the bill forbids scientific experts from participating in “advisory activities” that either directly or indirectly involve their own work. In case that wasn’t clear: experts would be forbidden from sharing their expertise in their own research — the bizarre assumption, apparently, being that having conducted peer-reviewed studies on a topic would constitute a conflict of interest. “In other words,” wrote Union of Concerned Scientists director Andrew A. Rosenberg in an editorial for RollCall, “academic scientists who know the most about a subject can’t weigh in, but experts paid by corporations who want to block regulations can.”HR 1422 would shake up the EPA’s Scientific Advisory Board, placing restrictions on scientists sharing their expertise in their own research--kinda defeating the purpose of being an expert on the panel!
 .
What the legislation would do is allow.... experts with overt financial ties to the industries affected by EPA regulations to dominate the EPA Scientific Board.
.
The White House, which threatened to veto the bill, said it would “negatively affect the appointment of experts and would weaken the scientific independence and integrity of the SAB [the EPA Scientific Advisory Board].”
.
Bob Conaway, a local community activist "condemns Paul Cook's ongoing attack on environmental oversight and review for his corporate buds. Isn't it enough the Koch Brothers can spend unlimited funds on campaigns and lobbying and gag the environmental independence of our best and brightest? Paul Cook just voted to give the keys to the henhouse to the Koches."

Friday, November 21, 2014

Congressman Paul Cook Lies to Get Environmental Groups' Support Before the Election....and approves of a scheme to steal more desert water after the election

 Congressman Paul Cook, before the November 4, 2014 election stated he opposed the Cadiz Water Project--when in fact Cook wrote a letter in September to Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell, recommending against any further environmental review of the project. The September 2014 letter (before the election) was not released publicly until November 6 (after the election) when Cadiz, Inc. did so in conjunction with its strategy to promote the project and stave off further legal & political challenges to the water theft's lying backers --e.g. Paul Cook -- all first reported in the San Bernardino Sentinel - http://sbsentinel.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/Sentinel-11-14-141.pdf

The Cadiz Water Project (also known as the Cadiz Valley Water Conservation, Recovery, and Storage Project)  is a proposal by proponent Los Angeles-based Cadiz, Inc. to extract an average of 50,000 acre-feet of water from the East Mojave Desert annually and convey it via pipeline to Orange and Los Angeles counties for use there.
.
In a letter dated June 12, 2013 to Interior Secretary Sally Jewell, Cook stated, “I am writing to request a reevaluation of the impact the Cadiz Valley Water Conservation, Recovery, and Storage Project will have on my constituents in the 8th District of California. The Cadiz Project, as it currently stands, is likely to impact San Bernardino County’s water resources, harming ranchers, rural communities, East Mojave landowners, and the National Chloride Company of America’s brine mining operation on Bristol Dry Lake. Moreover, the aggressive project pumping could harm the springs of the Mojave National Preserve and regional air quality, while exporting precious water resources out of San Bernardino County to ratepayers in Los Angeles and Orange counties.”
.
Cook’s June 12, 2013 letter continued, “In order to ensure this project won’t adversely affect my district (the Californian 8th Congressional District), I respectfully request the Cadiz Project be subject to a National Environmental Policy Act review.  I request that the United States Geologic Survey conduct an updated analysis of the hydrologic features of the project area and that any new or revised Cadiz Project proposals adhere to the principle of sustainable yield, meaning no more water would be pumped out of the aquifer than would be replaced through natural recharge as determined by the United States Geologic Survey. This is intended to protect sustainable water supplies for East Mojave communities and businesses.” Cook further wrote, “Currently, no federal environmental reviews or approvals have been conducted, despite numerous requests from the Bureau of Land Management that Cadiz Inc. supply them with specific project information relating to the construction of a 43-mile water  pipeline along the Arizona and California Railroad right-of-way.” Cook noted,  “Professional independent reviews have called into question the 32,500 acre-feet per year recharge rate Cadiz Inc. claims will naturally occur. These independent scientists concluded that the actual recharge rate is between 2,000 and 10,000 acre feet per year. There are serious doubts about the validity of the previous environmental studies, specifically the draft environmental impact statement“ for the project. Cook concluded, “This project must be examined thoroughly before it moves forward.”
.
Two months ago,  15 months after writing that letter, Paul Cook abruptly shifted course.
.
“Shortly after taking office last year, I wrote to you about the proposed Cadiz Valley Water Conservation, Recovery and Storage Project (“project”), which would be located in California’s Eastern Mojave Desert,” Cook wrote Jewell in a letter dated September 16, 2014. “The project will provide an additional 50,000 acre feet of water per year to the state’s dwindling water supply. It is important to me that my constituents and the land itself are protected from significant environmental harm. For that reason, I asked in my previous letter that a federal environmental review be undertaken for the project. Further developments have changed the dynamics surrounding the project, calling into question the need for federal environmental review and signaling a need to allow the project to move forward.
.
Cook’s letter was written on September 16 while he was engaged in an election campaign against Democratic challenger.
.
Cook betrayed the voters he represents by seeking to shut down further environmental review of the project by a letter NOT released until AFTER the election, AFTER he received environmental groups' support and help based on his June 2013 position letter.
.
Bob Conaway says "the sucking sound you will hear will be our wells being dried up and Paul Cook getting friendlier with Orange and Los Angeles County developers and governmental planners seeking to steal water wherever they can, like they did with Inyo County almost a quarter of a century ago".

Thursday, November 20, 2014

Cook's Statements on the Keystone Pipeline Show he Needs to Resign

Congressman Paul Cook shows what he is--a pitchman for the Koch Brothers and foreign oil interests. In one of his latest newsletters he says:
.
“Building the Keystone XL Pipeline is not just good environmental and fiscal policy, it’s good national security policy. The more energy America buys from close allies like Canada, the less dependent the country is on sources of foreign oil from unfriendly places like the Middle East, Venezuela, and Russia.  “I am urging the Senate to do the right thing and pass this bill. If the Senate passes the bill it will head to the President’s desk. President Obama can create tens of thousands of American jobs and strengthen our energy security with the stroke of the pen.”
.
In reading this, I can't help but think he doesn't read and or does not care about facts if he reads them.
.
First, we have an oil field (Bakken--en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakken_formation ) in North Dakota BIGGER than the entire Gulf of Mexico's reserves--the last time I looked, North Dakota is a "friendly place" and not a threat to our national security--we are developing it with American labor. We do not need to buy tar sand oil from "allies", which is what approving Keystone will do.
.
Second, good environmental policy, if oil has to be extracted and shipped, is to SHORTEN the distance of shipping, not lengthen it AND to have U.S. regulations that are proven in the lower 48 to be safer.
.
Third, it will (Keystone) if built will cost American jobs. It will bypass our production efforts in the upper Midwest .
.
Finally, Paul Cook needs a government lesson--he won re-election to House of Koch, not the US Senate which has consistently and correctly rejected the House of Koch's legislative agenda.
.
I ran against Cook because I believed he had sold out and was a threat to out national safety. Cook is still a threat to our Republic.
.
Time for Col. Cook to resign. 


Bob Conaway
Another Concerned & Informed Citizen the Koch Brothers Hate
22269 Miramot Road,  Apple Valley CA 92308